Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gnuman who wrote (60792)	7/19/1998 10:34:00 AM
From: Fred Fahmy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Gene, <The discussion concerned new Intel pricing and what it could mean to Intel's performance.> Are you suggesting that this information was not factored into the guidance Intel management provided just a few days ago?? I believe guidance calls for flat to slightly higher revenues with improving margins. BTW, although Intel's past guidance hasn't always been perfect, they generally do have a pretty good track record. FF

To: gnuman who wrote (60792)	7/19/1998 12:50:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Gene, RE:"to Paul Engel" "This is also an Intel investor thread, not just an AMD bashing thread. That's pretty much what Paulss paid to do, right? Bash any and every competitor of Intel. Jim

To: gnuman who wrote (60792)	7/19/1998 3:04:00 PM
From: VICTORIA GATE, MD	Respond to of 186894

Gene Parrott re<Funny, seem's like every time there's a discussion of anything that could impact Intel's bottom line, you change the subject to AMD Because Paul knew only AMD can slow down intel stock go up to $200 :-) vg

To: gnuman who wrote (60792)	7/19/1998 3:18:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Gene - Re: "And if PII350 down are under $200, what does that do to revenues and earnings? " Most of the PCs I see in stores or advertisements seem to be split into three camps - the ones that hover around $1000 - $1200, the ones that land in the $799 - $999 ranges, and the $1599 - $2299 ball park. In the higher priced range, nearly all are sporting Intel's 400 MHz Pentium II. My prediction is that Intel will make sure the 350 Mhz Pentium II will become the "entry point" for $1100 to $1200 PCs, Celerons will cover the $799 to $999 range (Mendocino at $999 or a little higher) and 400 MHz for >$1500 PCs. The apparently large volumes of 400 MHz PCs will help keep ASPs above the $220 - $230 range and the Xeons will boost it towards $240 or more over time. Remember - Intel will be adding a 450 MHz Pentium II later this month so that the "push down" in pricing of existing CPUs will be accompanied by the usually high pricing of the newsest/fastest Intel product - in this case the 450 MHz which will probably sell for >$650.00 at the launch, and remain well above $400 for the remainder of the year. The 450 MHz Pentium II will, of course, also help support Intel's ASPs, inching them ever higher. Re: " This is also an Intel investor thread, not just an AMD bashing thread. " Your comments about AMD seem somewhat janus-faced - since you have spared no effort to post the fabulous success stories of AMD's K6 in the sub $1000 market. However, I have yet to see you post the fabulous success stories of AMD's financial performance on this thread. Perhaps you should "close the loop" for us in that respect. Paul